Opinion · Supreme Court of New Jersey

Downing v. Oxweld Acetylene Company

113 N.J.L. 399

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Jurisdiction
New Jersey
Date
1934-09-27
Topic
general

Pee Curiam. The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Heher in the Supreme Court. For affirmance — The Chancellor, Parker, Lloyd, Bodine, Donges, Peeskie, Yan Buskibk, Kays, Deae, JJ. 9. For reversal — Case, Heteield, Wells, JJ. 3.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Downing v. Oxweld Acetylene Company. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Pee Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Heher in the Supreme Court.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Parker, Lloyd, Bodine, Donges, Peeskie, Yan Buskibk, Kays, Deae, JJ. 9.

For reversal — Case, Heteield, Wells, JJ. 3.